Key Digital's FatCATs distribute HDMI over Ethernet
By Darren Murph 
posted Aug 7th 2007 3:13PM
posted Aug 7th 2007 3:13PM
For those trying to transmit HDMI signals over Ethernet, Key Digital's FatCATs look to be the perfect solution. These baluns reportedly support video resolutions up to 1080p, meet the HDMI 1.3 standards, and are able to convert HDMI signals for transmission over vanilla CAT5 / CAT6 cabling. Moreover, the firm offers up an extender to pass along the digital signals for unusually long distances, and both the transmitting and receiving unit of the Digital FatCAT series are available in either freestanding or wall plate versions -- the latter of which includes an additional coaxial digital audio port. Of course, enabling you to use your pre-installed Ethernet to sling HDMI signals around won't come without a premium, as the transmitters and receivers ring up at $300 to $325 apiece, while a duo of extenders range from $250 to $300.
Cool product, but $300 for each the transmitter AND receiver...?? That's crazy. I could see $300 for the package deal, but not separately.
Saying that these use ethernet is in fact wrong. They simply use dedicated CAT5/CAT6 UTP cabling. CAT5 does not ethernet make. If they were ethernet, then you could plug them into your network and run them anywhere. These require dedicated cable runs.
Yes, but will it play nice with DRM?
Good catch, Justin. I knew what they meant, and it'd still work great in my place, but not at that price... ;(
I was gonna say... True 1080p requires 3 Gbps of bandwidth (that's uncompressed; if it were compressed, you'd refer to the signal mainly by the codec, be it MPEG-4 or something else, so we have to assume they mean uncompressed HD). Mere mortals can't exactly have a network that goes beyond 1 Gbps yet, so it didn't compute. And as Justin pointed out, there's a HUGE difference between CAT-5 and Ethernet.
You really need to change the misleading title. It's "HDMI over TWO dedicated CAT5 cables" not "HDMI over Ethernet".
BTW, I am not saying that video cannot be transmitted over cooper using Ethernet, but rather uncompressed digital video is, as someone already pointed out, on the order of 3Gbps for 1080p. All of the Ethernet-based video transmission (a la IPtv) is done on the compressed form and isn't uncompressed until it reaches the STB.
I am more inclined to believe that this is nothing more than using the physical material for raw transmission and borrows nothing from data transmission signaling commonly found in data networks.
Yes, "Ethernet" was a very poor choice of words, that word was not used in the press release at all. All it said was something to the effect of CAT5/5E/6 cabling. In fact, there is no networking at all, it's strictly point to point as hinted in an earlier post.
It's about as dumb of a statement as a headline calling Jupiter-like planet "squishy" because it doesn't have a firm surface.
It seems like everything can have its range extended dramatically by going over Ethernet... why not just use Cat6 for the standard in the first place?